Re: ID Numbering in Group and Passwd

[Dave Brown <daveb21@xxxxxxxxx>]

Aaaah, now i see what you're getting at :o) You explained it pretty well, I just didnt cotton on to the fact that you were using 60,000 as an arbitrary number. I spose we'll have to wait and see how the RFE goes - hopefully there is some sort of solution implemented whether its the high / low stuff or the uniqueness or something else Redhat come up with.

On 01/12/05, Robin Laing <Robin.Laing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dave Brown wrote:
> I have had a look at the RFE you filed and to be honest i disagree with
> the way you have asked for it to be fixed. By selecting the GIDs in
> decending order from 60,000 down and the uid ascending from 500 there
> still exists the possibility for these 2 numbers to collide if you have
> more than 59500 users / groups. Granted this is a large number but for
> big institutions / companies this isnt unreasonable. I personally have
> worked with two installations that this numbering scheme would have
> caused problems.
>
> I believe that the underlying code should be changed so that when adding
> a user the lowest available number which is not currently used by either
> a group or user should be the one selected. That way you can have as
> many users as you want (up to 2^32 of course :o) without running into
> any clashes.
>
> I will add a note to your RFE explaining my thoughts and see what RedHat
> reckon. Thanks for your input.
>
> Cheers
> Dave
>
> On 26/11/05, *Robin Laing * < Robin.Laing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:Robin.Laing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>     Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
>      > On Thu, 2005-24-11 at 09:31 +0000, Dave Brown wrote:
>      >
>      >>Robin / Others - what do you think? Depending on the general
>     consensus
>      >>I'll probably submit a feature enhancement request.
>      >
>      >
>      > If you do enter a RFE, can you send a reply to this thread with
>     bugzilla
>      > #?  I'd like to watch it since I've recently run into this problem -
>      > it's a major pain in the ass.
>      >
>      > Regards,
>      >
>      > Ranbir
>      >
>
>     I entered an RFE this afternoon.
>     Bug 174205
>
>     Robin.
>
Some times I am not that good at explaining things.

I have added to the RFE taking your comments into account as you will
see.  I am reposting some of my comments here for the list.

I used 60,00 as an arbitrary number.  If Fedora can work with 2^32
GID's then change 60,000 to 2^32 and work from there.  It isn't a big
deal.

The idea is to search from high to low for GID's and low to high for
UID/GID combos.

This also minimizes any holes in the UID/GID mix unless users are deleted.

Thanks for the suggestion.

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list